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.

Brother - read all the FAQ maybe?

It states the first model is the target. Once you have selected the target you roll to hit, THEN you place the line which autohits everything else.

SkySerpent wrote:

Does this mean Obliterators have Eternal Warrior now?

Only if they follow the rules from Codex: Daemons(hint, they DON'T).

Aldarionn wrote:That seems to be the logical interpretation to me, but it seems so far outside of how the game has been played the last few years that I am having difficulty accepting it. I would hope that if the vast majority of people were playing something so obviously wrong from the way GW intended it to be played that they would have released an FAQ much sooner than now in order to correct it. Powers like Jaws of the World Wolf, Blood Lance, Murderous Hurricane and Mind War all say "If the test is past then X", not "If the test is passed, roll to hit and X" and even the Rulebook states that psychic shooting attacks roll to hit unless they hit automatically or state otherwise. Considering the wording for those powers, I always assumed it meant they "stated otherwise" and played it accordingly.

I guess I could be wrong.

My point of contention is that the PSA have always required a "to hit roll" due to haveing to follow the rules for shooting. However this does not over ride rules that are specific to weapons (blast and template weapons) nor does it over ride specific exceptions outlined in a codex. Specific > General.

The BRB FAQ re-states that PSA are required to "roll to hit". However, again, this does not over ride rules that are specific to weapons (blast and template weapons) nor does it over ride specific exceptions outlined in a codex. Specific > General.

Nothing has changed . So if you guys believe that JOTWW suddenly requires a to hit roll now....then why didn't you believe it required one before?

nosferatu1001 wrote:Brother - read all the FAQ maybe?

It states the first model is the target. Once you have selected the target you roll to hit, THEN you place the line which autohits everything else.

Oh Nos, trying to draw me out already. I read this FAQ just like I correctly read many of the GK rules you are now complaining about being wrong about.. But I am not going to draw you out on that stuff, the issue here is Jaws.

The FAQ states that all you need is LOS to the first model affected. That model is treated as the target model, but you do not declare it as the target of Jaws, you do not measure range to to it as the target of Jaws, and you do not roll to hit it as the target of Jaws.

In fact, per the Jaws rule, the 24" line drawn from the rune priest never hits a model, it only needs to touch a model to force it to take an initiative test. As a specific PSA it has it's own rules for determining how it affects models, one of them being that a to-hit roll is not required.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Brother - read all the FAQ maybe?

It states the first model is the target. Once you have selected the target you roll to hit, THEN you place the line which autohits everything else.

Wouldn't the line have to be placed already for the purposes of finding the first model to be affected?

Brother Ramses wrote: one of them being that a to-hit roll is not required.

Sorry, new FAQ says a to-hit roll is always required.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Brother - read all the FAQ maybe?

It states the first model is the target. Once you have selected the target you roll to hit, THEN you place the line which autohits everything else.

I completely un utterly agree.

Q: What psychic powers count as psychic shooting attacks? (p50) A: Any psychic power with a profile like that of a ranged weapon (i.e. has a range, strength and AP value) and any psychic power that specifically states that it is a psychic shooting attack.

DarknessEternal wrote:

Brother Ramses wrote: one of them being that a to-hit roll is not required.

Sorry, new FAQ says a to-hit roll is always required.

Which really changes nothing. PSA were always required to make a "to hit roll" per the BRB as they have always been required to follow all the shooting rules listed in the BRB. However, just as there are specific weapons that make exceptions to the basic shooting rule requiring you to make a to-hit role, so too were there several PSA listed in the various codices (like JOTWW, Paroxysm, ect) that made exceptions to this rule as well. The rules in the codices still over-ride the BRB and they likewise over-ride the BRB FAQ. If GW wants to change how JOTWW functions, then they will need to revise the SW FAQ.

Note to self: drop all falchions in army.

They were okay with +2 attacks, worse than Lightning Claws, but still useful. Now they're not only crap, but crap you have to pay extra for while losing your invulnerable save.

Eh... long day and living lightning not the best example...

Unless Jaws says something along the lines of "automatically hits" or "does not roll to hit", I don't see how you can ignore rolling to hit since it is a psychic shooting attack and all psychic shooting attacks must roll to hit just as all psychic powers must take a psychic test.

For all those ripping the Falchions off your models, I'd advise waiting 36 hours. Maybe GW will have changed their minds ... which codex was that they revised within the week of its release? SW?

Brothererekose wrote:For all those ripping the Falchions off your models, I'd advise waiting 36 hours.

I wouldn't bother waiting. While the wording in the codex wasn't the best, I think anyone who seriously thought that they were going to FAQ in favour of the +2 attacks was kidding themselves.

insaniak wrote:
I wouldn't bother waiting. While the wording in the codex wasn't the best, I think anyone who seriously thought that they were going to FAQ in favour of the +2 attacks was kidding themselves.

The +2 attacks argument did make sense as presented by some posters, but it seems that it was after all just a wargear option that happened to be represented by a pair of NFW.

Not for WAAC armies, but some people prefer the aesthetics over the function. I don't know if it makes the models that have them utterly worthless, but I can't say I sympathize with anyone who's bringing clippers to their models because of +1 attack for five points (though losing +2I or Inv. Save).

Maybe we'll understand this (and some others, Nemesis Doomfists for instance) when the next edition comes out.

What I found interesting was the number of times GW stated that descriptions as well as specific rules were valid, such as how Tau pulse weapons are effected by Plasma Siphon. Which means that GW does not consider "fluff /= rules" to be a legal argument regarding unit/item entry descriptions versus the unit/item rules and stat line.

SJ

jeffersonian000 wrote:Which means that GW does not consider "fluff /= rules" to be a legal argument regarding unit/item entry descriptions versus the unit/item rules and stat line.

That's pretty consistent for them. We had a similar result with the Doom of Malantai's Warp Field. As far back as second edition, GW have ruled in favour of descriptive text being valid for deciding how to apply rules that apply to certain types of unit or certain types of weapons.

So many people were so vehemently wrong about the scout-shunting thing. Some of the arguments were hilarious. Their tears bring me joy.

This is a great faq overall. And thats coming from a Tau player!

ObiFett wrote:So many people were so vehemently wrong about the scout-shunting thing. Some of the arguments were hilarious. Their tears bring me joy.

This is a great faq overall. And thats coming from a Tau player!

I think this earns you a Pain Token ... dunno what you're gonna do with it, though.

Brothererekose wrote:

ObiFett wrote:So many people were so vehemently wrong about the scout-shunting thing. Some of the arguments were hilarious. Their tears bring me joy.

This is a great faq overall. And thats coming from a Tau player!

I think this earns you a Pain Token ... dunno what you're gonna do with it, though.

Give his kroot Feel No Pain, turning them from "Practice Dummies" to "Meh"?

ObiFett wrote:So many people were so vehemently wrong about the scout-shunting thing. Some of the arguments were hilarious. Their tears bring me joy.

This is a great faq overall. And thats coming from a Tau player!

No, Shunting in the Scout move was perfectly legal. Turboboosting and moving Flat out is legal.

logically, shunting was legal.


GW just decided to go against the rules and make a further stipulation.

ObiFett wrote:So many people were so vehemently wrong about the scout-shunting thing.

It's worth keeping in mind that the FAQ doesn't prove anyone's original reading of the rules wrong. It simply clarifies which interpretation of the rules GW chose to follow. In essense, other interpretations are incorrect from this point on, but weren't necessarily wrong before.

Even as i thought the FaQ was a decent one overall..I did see a few things i can see causing arguments now..

The Assault Phase
Q: Can a model equipped with multiple grenades use
all of them in the same Assault phase? (p36)
A: Yes.

People will now be trying to use both melta bombs and krak grenades in the same assault

Q: A psyker can use one psychic power per Mastery
Level, per turn. Is this per player turn? (p21)
A: Yes, otherwise it would state per game turn.

this leaves sooooo much of an opening....I see people trying psa now on their opponents turn..

Q: If Justicar Thawn is dead at the end of a game
involving kill points, does he only give away one kill
point regardless of how many times he was killed?
(p43)
A: Yes. It is also worth noting that if he does come
back, he is treated as a seperate unit from that point
on and as such both he and his unit will eachbe worth
a kill point.

It may be because of me being tired, but doesn't this contradict itself?

Grey Templar wrote:

ObiFett wrote:So many people were so vehemently wrong about the scout-shunting thing. Some of the arguments were hilarious. Their tears bring me joy.

This is a great faq overall. And thats coming from a Tau player!

No, Shunting in the Scout move was perfectly legal. Turboboosting and moving Flat out is legal.

logically, shunting was legal.


GW just decided to go against the rules and make a further stipulation.

ahahahaha.

Dude's still going at it.

Classic.

Prophaniti wrote:Q: A psyker can use one psychic power per Mastery
Level, per turn. Is this per player turn? (p21)
A: Yes, otherwise it would state per game turn.

this leaves sooooo much of an opening....I see people trying psa now on their opponents turn..

The FAQ doesn't say that you ignore the basic tenants of shooting attacks though. So they still stand. The PSA itself would have to specifically state that it allows you to use it during your opponents turn in order to override this. Can't say that I am aware of such a PSA .

Brother Ramses wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Brother - read all the FAQ maybe?

It states the first model is the target. Once you have selected the target you roll to hit, THEN you place the line which autohits everything else.

Oh Nos, trying to draw me out already. I read this FAQ just like I correctly read many of the GK rules you are now complaining about being wrong about.. But I am not going to draw you out on that stuff, the issue here is Jaws.

The FAQ states that all you need is LOS to the first model affected. That model is treated as the target model, but you do not declare it as the target of Jaws, you do not measure range to to it as the target of Jaws, and you do not roll to hit it as the target of Jaws.

In fact, per the Jaws rule, the 24" line drawn from the rune priest never hits a model, it only needs to touch a model to force it to take an initiative test. As a specific PSA it has it's own rules for determining how it affects models, one of them being that a to-hit roll is not required.

Not taking sides either way on this, but you may have to come to terms with the fact that when it matters (aka a tourney/prize event) someone may call a ref over and you may lose the ruling, since its not crystal clear. As I read it I say you need to roll to hit, in fact most of my club agreed, the nay votes came from the 2 space wolf players. One dident care as he found the ability cheezy and never used it anyway. The other...well hes a win at all costs kinda guy.

ObiFett wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:

ObiFett wrote:So many people were so vehemently wrong about the scout-shunting thing. Some of the arguments were hilarious. Their tears bring me joy.

This is a great faq overall. And thats coming from a Tau player!

No, Shunting in the Scout move was perfectly legal. Turboboosting and moving Flat out is legal.

logically, shunting was legal.


GW just decided to go against the rules and make a further stipulation.

ahahahaha.

Dude's still going at it.

Classic.

Haha, I was gonna bite my tongue but since you're saying it, I'll join in.

TAKE. THAT. SHUNT-PUNCHERS.

I've never been so smug for a ruling. Love that they are still arguing it.

Wait did I miss something? They didn't clarify if psycannons have rending whether they are being used as assault or heavy weapons...

Prophaniti wrote:The Assault Phase
Q: Can a model equipped with multiple grenades use
all of them in the same Assault phase? (p36)
A: Yes.[/i]

People will now be trying to use both melta bombs and krak grenades in the same assault

That won't over-ride the specific rules for using grenades against vehicles.

Q: A psyker can use one psychic power per Mastery
Level, per turn. Is this per player turn? (p21)
A: Yes, otherwise it would state per game turn.

this leaves sooooo much of an opening....I see people trying psa now on their opponents turn..

It doesn't leave an opening at all. Using powers in your opponent's turn is possible... if you have a specific rule that says you can do so.

Q: If Justicar Thawn is dead at the end of a game
involving kill points, does he only give away one kill
point regardless of how many times he was killed?
(p43)
A: Yes. It is also worth noting that if he does come
back, he is treated as a seperate unit from that point
on and as such both he and his unit will eachbe worth
a kill point.

It may be because of me being tired, but doesn't this contradict itself?

No. It's saying that Thrawn only ever gives up one kill point... but his unit will be another.

BR - so Jaws has a target, but you dont treat it as a target in all respects?

Nope, rules disagree with you. Nice try

GW blatantly changing the rules of the game (scoring dreadnoughts, falchions) dsoesnt make you "right". It just means your reading of the rules is as accurate as GWs. Not a compliment.

Orock wrote:

Brother Ramses wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Brother - read all the FAQ maybe?

It states the first model is the target. Once you have selected the target you roll to hit, THEN you place the line which autohits everything else.

Oh Nos, trying to draw me out already. I read this FAQ just like I correctly read many of the GK rules you are now complaining about being wrong about.. But I am not going to draw you out on that stuff, the issue here is Jaws.

The FAQ states that all you need is LOS to the first model affected. That model is treated as the target model, but you do not declare it as the target of Jaws, you do not measure range to to it as the target of Jaws, and you do not roll to hit it as the target of Jaws.

In fact, per the Jaws rule, the 24" line drawn from the rune priest never hits a model, it only needs to touch a model to force it to take an initiative test. As a specific PSA it has it's own rules for determining how it affects models, one of them being that a to-hit roll is not required.

Not taking sides either way on this, but you may have to come to terms with the fact that when it matters (aka a tourney/prize event) someone may call a ref over and you may lose the ruling, since its not crystal clear. As I read it I say you need to roll to hit, in fact most of my club agreed, the nay votes came from the 2 space wolf players. One dident care as he found the ability cheezy and never used it anyway. The other...well hes a win at all costs kinda guy.

When I got home and had a good chance to read everything while kicking back, the entire argument became moot.

New BRB FAQ:

Do psychic shooting attacks roll to hit?

Yes.

I then asked myself,

Do ALL psychic shooting attacks roll to hit?

No.

Read the first paragraph of Psykers on page 50. Jaws and MH are exceptions to the BRB and the BRB FAQ by their rules as written in the SW codex, as is Blood Lance in the BA codex, and whatever it is for the Tyranid codex and Eldar codex.

As written, at no time do you roll to hit for Jaws. A psychic test is taken and a line is placed with the only restriction that the first model it affects must be in LOS.

As written, at no time do you roll to hit for MH. A target is chosen, range is checked, a psychic test is taken, the target unit takes 3d6 Str 3 hits with AP- .

The exact same with Thunderclap. They are all exceptions to rules and FAQs of the BRB that are covered in the SW codex.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
GW blatantly clarifying the rules of the game (scoring dreadnoughts, falchions) makes you "right". And it means your reading of the rules is as accurate as the people who wrote them and were smart enough to figure out the intent of the rules. Most definitely a compliment.

fixed that for ya